1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a stock company established for the purpose of the electricity construction business, and the Defendant is a quasi-governmental institution established for the purpose of the development, power generation, transmission, transformation, and related businesses of electric resources under the Korea Electric Power Corporation Act.

B. On November 2016, the Defendant: (a) appointed the Plaintiff as a collaborative entity for “high voltageB Corporation B in the North Korean Headquarters B in the year 2017; and (b) concluded the said construction contract (hereinafter “instant contract”); (c) on November 2, 2018, the Plaintiff rendered the instant contract to the Plaintiff on the ground that “the Plaintiff provided a bribe of KRW 65 million for budgetary allocation and construction convenience as a party to the instant contract; and (d) the Plaintiff offered a bribe of KRW 65 million for the purpose of budgetary allocation and construction convenience; and (e) was subject to the instant disposition of restricting the participation of the Plaintiff for six months pursuant to Article 39(2) of the Act on the Management of Public Institutions (hereinafter “Public Institutions Operation Act”).

[The facts that there is no dispute over the basis of recognition, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 6, and 14, and the purport of the whole pleadings.]

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. According to the Administrative Procedures Act, in a case where an administrative agency holds a hearing, the administrative agency should give prior notice to the parties ten days prior to the beginning of the hearing, but the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff a public notice on the hearing procedure held on October 12, 2018, which was held on October 5, 2018. As such, the instant disposition is procedurally unlawful.

B. The Plaintiff did not have any relation to the offering of a bribe as the Defendant alleged as the ground for disposition, and there is no ground for the instant disposition.

C. The instant disposition deviates from and abused discretionary authority.

3. Attached statements to the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

4. Whether the disposition is lawful.

A. According to Article 21(2) of the Administrative Procedures Act, where an administrative agency intends to conduct a hearing, it shall notify the parties of the written hearing not later than 10 days prior to the beginning of the hearing. Thus, if an administrative agency implements the hearing procedure under the above provision and fails to comply with the prescribed time limit for arrival of the hearing.